People v.

Melissa Chua
GR No. 184058 March 10, 2010

Facts:

Melissa Chua and Josie Campos were indicted with large scale illegal recruitment. The information reads that on
September 2002 in Manila, she promised job employment as factory worker in Taiwan to Erik Tan, Marilyn and King
without first having secured the required license from the Department of Labor and Employment as required by law.
Accused pleaded not guilty. Josie remained at large. Appellant denied the charges. Claiming having worked as a
temporary cashier from January to October, 2002 at the office of Golden Gate, owned by one Marilyn Calueng, she
maintained that Golden Gate was a licensed recruitment agency and that Josie, who is her godmother, was an agent.
She alleged that she received P8000 from Tan, and Marilyn, not King and remitted the same to Calueng. RTC
convicted appellant for illegal recruitment and 3 out of 5 counts of estafa. CA affirmed.

** Respecting the cases for Estafa, the appellate court, noting that a person convicted of illegal recruitment may, in
addition, be convicted of Estafa as penalized under Article 315, paragraph 2 (a) of the Revised Penal Code, held that
the elements thereof were su ciently established, viz.: that appellant deceived the complainants by assuring them of
employment in Taiwan provided they pay the required placement fee; that relying on such representation, the
complainants paid appellant the amount demanded; that her representation turned out to be false because she failed to
deploy them as promised; and that the complainants suffered damages when they failed to be reimbursed the amounts
they paid

Issue: WON CA erred in affirming her conviction

Held: NO.
• It is clear that any recruitment activities to be undertaken by non-licensee or non-holder of contracts, or as in
the present case, an agency with an expired license, shall be deemed illegal and punishable under Article 39
of the Labor Code of the Philippines. And illegal recruitment is deemed committed in large scale if committed
against three or more persons individually or as a group.
• Elements of large scale illegal prosecution:
o (1) the accused undertook a recruitment activity under Article 13 (b) or any prohibited practice under
Article 34 of the Labor Code;
o (2) the accused did not have the license or the authority to lawfully engage in the recruitment and
placement of workers; and
o (3) the accused committed such illegal activity against three or more persons individually or as a
group.
• In the present case, Golden Gate, of which appellant admitted being a cashier from January to October 2002,
was initially authorized to recruit workers for deployment abroad. Per the certification from the POEA,
Golden Gate's license only expired on February 23, 2002 and it was delisted from the roster of licensed
agencies on April 2, 2002.

• Assuming arguendo that appellant was unaware of the illegal nature of the recruitment business of Golden
Gate, that does not free her of liability either. Illegal Recruitment in Large Scale penalized under Republic
Act No. 8042, or "The Migrant Workers and Overseas Filipinos Act of 1995," is a special law, a violation of
which is malum prohibitum, not malum in se. Intent is thus immaterial. And that explains why appellant was,
aside from Estafa, convicted of such offense.